Re: BUG #15460: Error while creating index or constraint
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: paul.vanderlinden@mapcreator.eu,
PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>,
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Date: 2018-10-29T16:51:03Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> writes: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 3:31 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> LOG: performsort of 0 done: CPU: user: 250.03 s, system: 42.66 s, elapsed: 294.35 s >>> LOG: parallel external sort of 0 ended, 462886 disk blocks used: CPU: user: 250.03 s, system: 42.66 s, elapsed: 298.95 s >>> LOG: begin index sort: unique = f, workMem = 2096128, randomAccess = f >>> LOG: performsort of -1 starting: CPU: user: 0.00 s, system: 0.00 s, elapsed: 0.00 s >>> LOG: could not rmdir directory "base/pgsql_tmp/pgsql_tmp5088.0.sharedfileset": Directory not empty >>> ERROR: could not determine size of temporary file "0" >> "performsort of -1"? Seems a bit suspicious. > This just refers to the leader Tuplesortstate. It isn't suspicious. > We follow the convention that worker -1 is the leader within > tuplesort.c. Hmm. But the sort of "0" has already completed, according to the first couple of log lines I quoted. Why is something still trying to access it? Why is a worker trying to do anything at all with the leader's Tuplesortstate? > trace_sort is a developer option, so this seems fine to me. That's a poor excuse for ignoring the message style guidelines. There are many reasons why even experts could get confused trying to follow badly-written messages. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Have BufFileSize() ereport() on FileSize() failure.
- 1a990b207b86 12.0 landed
- 95c45718126f 11.2 landed
-
Use 64 bit type for BufFileSize().
- fa2ceaca4358 11.2 landed
- aa5518304213 12.0 landed
-
Adjust trace_sort log messages.
- cb6f8a9a7243 12.0 landed
- 886319d71bd5 11.1 landed
-
Fix some sloppiness in the new BufFileSize() and BufFileAppend() functions.
- 445e31bdc749 11.0 cited